Basic Training Gliders

At 23:18 04 December 2005, Jack wrote:
Derek Copeland wrote:

The front
cockpit has a largish headrest that almost completely
blocks the forward view from the rear cockpit. In
Europe,
because the DG1000 is certified by EASA, we are not
even allowed to remove it, as it is specified in the
type certificate! While a headrest may be an important
safety item in a car to protect you from whiplash
in
a rear end shunt, I am still trying to work out in
what circumstances a glider might get rammed from
behind?



Derek

Perhaps you should try to understand whiplash.

When the glider/car or whatever is carrying a body
is stopped suddenly the head goes forwards.

When restrained by the seatbelts the remainder of the
body cannot follow it. Hence in cars we now have airbags.
Unfortunately for the poor neck, the shoulders and
head eventually whip back (in reality a fraction of
a second).

The shear forces on the neck as it goes backwards from
the top of the seat are enormous hence in cars, the
head restraint is fitted. It is not a head rest.

Perhaps for gliders we should insist on airbags and
head restraints for both seats?

Having flown from the rear of many two seaters the
head gear and hairstyle of the front seat passenger
causes more problems than a well designed head retraint.


IMHO the worst thing the front seat passenger can wear
is a white hat or an have affro/permed hairstyle.

Dave

Dave Martin wrote in
:

(snip)
Perhaps for gliders we should insist on airbags and
head restraints for both seats?

Having flown from the rear of many two seaters the
head gear and hairstyle of the front seat passenger
causes more problems than a well designed head retraint.


IMHO the worst thing the front seat passenger can wear
is a white hat or an have affro/permed hairstyle.

Dave

No glider air bags for me. Most of my landings would set them off!

When I fly our Duo I insist on the front seat person wearing a dark colored
hat. Otherwise all the rear seater sees in the canopy is reflections of
white hat.
-Bob Korves

At 22:42 04 December 2005, Don Johnstone wrote:
The answer to the whiplash question is very simple
and whiplash describes the action which causes the
injury. When a car, or glider decelerates very rapidly,
the head, which is unrestrained and has a fairly high
mass continues to move forward until it is stopped
at full body extension. It then whips back and if there
is nothing to stop it extends backwards, that is what
causes the injury. It is correct that a headrest prevents
injury in a rear shunt but that is not the primary
cause of 'whiplash' injuries. It is the whipping action
following a sudden deceleration.
I suppose if an impact in a glider is severe enough
to cause the whiplash then that injury may be the least
of your problems as you are much closer to the crash
in a glider than you are in a car.
--------------------------------------
I actually did an instructional flight in the back
seat of a DG1000 today, and was reminded how poor the
forward visibility from the rear cockpit is. You have
to peer though a small semi-circular gap between the
canopy hoop, the front headrest and the student's head.
The forward view is far worse than in a K13 with its
one piece canopy, and not helped by the fact that you
sit fairly low down in the cockpit. I think that I
will make a point of only flying this type with well
switched on students who keep a good look out!

I suppose that it's a case of what is the greater risk.
Whiplash in the event of a crash or heavy landing,
or a head on mid-air collision with another aircraft
because you can't see ahead?

BTW I don't dislike the DG1000. It handles and performs
beautifully, it has good airbrakes (unlike the Duo
Discus), it is fully aerobatic in 18 metre mode (unlike
the Duo) and you can operate the undercarriage from
both cockpits (unlike the Duo).

BUT, I don't like the restricted view from the rear
cockpit, the difficult and heavy ground handling, getting
in and out of the thing, and the trigger type trimmer
mounted on the stick that doesn't seem to work. You
end up trimming with the trimmer tell-tale knob on
the side of the cockpit wall, so why bother with the
trigger in the first place?

Good try for the ideal trainer DG, but no cigar yet!


Derek Copeland

P.S. The r.a.s. black hole seems to re-appeared. this
is my third attempt at posting this!

"Derek Copeland" wrote in
message ...
At 22:42 04 December 2005, Don Johnstone wrote:
The answer to the whiplash question is very simple
and whiplash describes the action which causes the
injury. When a car, or glider decelerates very rapidly,
the head, which is unrestrained and has a fairly high
mass continues to move forward until it is stopped
at full body extension. It then whips back and if there
is nothing to stop it extends backwards, that is what
causes the injury. It is correct that a headrest prevents
injury in a rear shunt but that is not the primary
cause of 'whiplash' injuries. It is the whipping action
following a sudden deceleration.
I suppose if an impact in a glider is severe enough
to cause the whiplash then that injury may be the least
of your problems as you are much closer to the crash
in a glider than you are in a car.
--------------------------------------
I actually did an instructional flight in the back
seat of a DG1000 today, and was reminded how poor the
forward visibility from the rear cockpit is. You have
to peer though a small semi-circular gap between the
canopy hoop, the front headrest and the student's head.
The forward view is far worse than in a K13 with its
one piece canopy, and not helped by the fact that you
sit fairly low down in the cockpit. I think that I
will make a point of only flying this type with well
switched on students who keep a good look out!

I suppose that it's a case of what is the greater risk.
Whiplash in the event of a crash or heavy landing,
or a head on mid-air collision with another aircraft
because you can't see ahead?

BTW I don't dislike the DG1000. It handles and performs
beautifully, it has good airbrakes (unlike the Duo
Discus), it is fully aerobatic in 18 metre mode (unlike
the Duo) and you can operate the undercarriage from
both cockpits (unlike the Duo).

BUT, I don't like the restricted view from the rear
cockpit, the difficult and heavy ground handling, getting
in and out of the thing, and the trigger type trimmer
mounted on the stick that doesn't seem to work. You
end up trimming with the trimmer tell-tale knob on
the side of the cockpit wall, so why bother with the
trigger in the first place?

Good try for the ideal trainer DG, but no cigar yet!


Derek Copeland

P.S. The r.a.s. black hole seems to re-appeared. this
is my third attempt at posting this!


It does seem like the cockpits just keep getting worse. Maybe someone
should just try to improve the old Grob 103. Putting everything else aside,
the cockpit was nice.

Maybe the perfect trainer will be the Stemme S2 - if they ever build it.

Bill Daniels

Derek Copeland wrote in
:

BUT, I don't like the restricted view from the rear
cockpit, the difficult and heavy ground handling, getting
in and out of the thing, and the trigger type trimmer
mounted on the stick that doesn't seem to work. You
end up trimming with the trimmer tell-tale knob on
the side of the cockpit wall, so why bother with the
trigger in the first place?

Good try for the ideal trainer DG, but no cigar yet!


Derek Copeland


Yes, the DG trimmer control is cr@p, in all the DG's I have flown. Also
the very stiff aileron control in the 1000 -- takes both hands on the stick
to enter a thermal.

The front seat of the 1000 is quite comfortable, but the back seat is like
sitting on a toilet.

The Duo has a few minor faults, but the visibility is superb from both
cockpits and the handling is light and well balanced, nore like a single
seater.
-Bob Korves

Derek
Try adjusting the sitting position to suit you before you fly in the thing.
Most instructors tend to hop and fly without getting things right. The
number of times I have people whinging about the **** poor this and the crap
that and I find that they havn't even noticed something is adjustable to
alleviate that issue.
The rear seat of the 1000 is adjustable up and down. I am 6'4 and have no
trouble sitting too low in the back of our 1000 if I don't raise the seat.
In fact the first time I flew it from the rear I assumed I would need the
seat bottomed out. Big mistake! I couldn't see and could only just reach the
rudder pedals. I felt like I was in a pit. Next flight adjusted the seat
till my head just cleared the canopy and things where totally different. Far
better vis

Anyways, I don't believe there ever will be the perfect trainer. Too many
opinions and not enough manufacturers to ever sort this issue out. Its all a
compromise.

But hows this for a spec. ( Feel free to add )
1.Benign enough that a student could learn to fly it and not get into
trouble after only 10 flights but with the flick off a switch becomes the
spin trainer from Hell.

2.Heavy enough to penetrate upwind into 30knts to the next wave band and
light enough to be rigged single-handed by a little old lady.

3.Low enough to the ground to allow entry by height challenged ATC cadets
but with a enough ground clearance and U/C travel to permit 15 ft flares
with associated stall and arrivals without spinal readjustment.


I actually did an instructional flight in the back
seat of a DG1000 today, and was reminded how poor the
forward visibility from the rear cockpit is. You have
to peer though a small semi-circular gap between the
canopy hoop, the front headrest and the student's head.
The forward view is far worse than in a K13 with its
one piece canopy, and not helped by the fact that you
sit fairly low down in the cockpit. I think that I
will make a point of only flying this type with well
switched on students who keep a good look out!

I suppose that it's a case of what is the greater risk.
Whiplash in the event of a crash or heavy landing,
or a head on mid-air collision with another aircraft
because you can't see ahead?

BTW I don't dislike the DG1000. It handles and performs
beautifully, it has good airbrakes (unlike the Duo
Discus), it is fully aerobatic in 18 metre mode (unlike
the Duo) and you can operate the undercarriage from
both cockpits (unlike the Duo).

BUT, I don't like the restricted view from the rear
cockpit, the difficult and heavy ground handling, getting
in and out of the thing, and the trigger type trimmer
mounted on the stick that doesn't seem to work. You
end up trimming with the trimmer tell-tale knob on
the side of the cockpit wall, so why bother with the
trigger in the first place?

Good try for the ideal trainer DG, but no cigar yet!


Derek Copeland

P.S. The r.a.s. black hole seems to re-appeared. this
is my third attempt at posting this!

At 01:18 05 December 2005, Bob Korves wrote:

Yes, the DG trimmer control is cr@p, in all the DG's
I have flown. Also
the very stiff aileron control in the 1000 -- takes
both hands on the stick
to enter a thermal.

The front seat of the 1000 is quite comfortable, but
the back seat is like
sitting on a toilet.

The Duo has a few minor faults, but the visibility
is superb from both
cockpits and the handling is light and well balanced,
nore like a single
seater.
-Bob Korves

Bob,

The ailerons on our DG1000 are not at all heavy, and
it has the most nicely co-ordinated controls of any
two seater glider I have ever flown (Duo is also nice).
Have you tried oiling the hinges?

Derek Copeland

Derek Copeland wrote:
The ailerons on our DG1000 are not at all heavy, and
it has the most nicely co-ordinated controls of any
two seater glider I have ever flown (Duo is also nice).
Have you tried oiling the hinges?


Having flown the same DG1000, I have to agree with Bob, the ailerons are
quite heavy, although not quite as heavy as the DG505 I flew. Neither
of us belong to the clubs that own these gliders, so we can't attest to
the quality of the maintenance (but the 1000 is less than 3 years old).
I normally like DG handling (I've owned a 101 and a 303), but the two
seaters are simply not as pleasant to fly as the Duo...

Marc

Derek Copeland wrote in
:



At 01:18 05 December 2005, Bob Korves wrote:

Yes, the DG trimmer control is cr@p, in all the DG's
I have flown. Also
the very stiff aileron control in the 1000 -- takes
both hands on the stick
to enter a thermal.
(snip)
-Bob Korves

Bob,

The ailerons on our DG1000 are not at all heavy, and
it has the most nicely co-ordinated controls of any
two seater glider I have ever flown (Duo is also nice).
Have you tried oiling the hinges?

Derek Copeland

The one I flew was very stiff. It was just OK in straight flight and when
established in a thermal. To achieve a brisk roll with full stick
deflection during thermal entry required both hands on the stick. Pitch
forces were much lighter. The glider I flew had several hundred hours over
several years. It may indeed need the controls lubed or some other
maintenance performed.

BTW, the one I flew had the retractable three wheel set-up, and the ground
handling was very good, better than a Grob 103 Twin II (or a Duo).

The 1000 also does very nice loops and wingovers (20m). I have it on very
good authority that the Duo does very nice loops and wingovers, too,
despite the prohibition on the placard...
-Bob Korves

Bob Korves bkorves@winfirstDECIMALcom wrote in
. 44:

Derek Copeland wrote in
:



At 01:18 05 December 2005, Bob Korves wrote:

Yes, the DG trimmer control is cr@p, in all the DG's
I have flown. Also
the very stiff aileron control in the 1000 -- takes
both hands on the stick
to enter a thermal.
(snip)
-Bob Korves

Bob,

The ailerons on our DG1000 are not at all heavy, and
it has the most nicely co-ordinated controls of any
two seater glider I have ever flown (Duo is also nice).
Have you tried oiling the hinges?

Derek Copeland

The one I flew was very stiff. It was just OK in straight flight and
when established in a thermal. To achieve a brisk roll with full
stick deflection during thermal entry required both hands on the
stick. Pitch forces were much lighter. The glider I flew had several
hundred hours over several years. It may indeed need the controls
lubed or some other maintenance performed.

BTW, the one I flew had the retractable three wheel set-up, and the
ground handling was very good, better than a Grob 103 Twin II (or a
Duo).

The 1000 also does very nice loops and wingovers (20m). I have it on
very good authority that the Duo does very nice loops and wingovers,
too, despite the prohibition on the placard...
-Bob Korves


I should also mention that we were flying in the Sierra Nevada mountains of
California/Nevada on a day with 10+ knot thermals. Pullups into thermals
were at 80-100+ knots.
-Bob